BOARD DATE:	  24 January 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120012006 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), two awards of the Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC), "Republic of Gallantry Cross Medal," and one bronze service star for wear on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal be added to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

2.  The applicant states:

* these awards were never entered in his records
* he was assigned to the U.S. Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) Advisory Team 4 and this unit was cited for the PUC
* he was assigned to the 37th Signal Battalion and this unit was cited for the MUC  
* the U.S. MACV was cited for the MUC during the period 1965 to 1967
* his records were corrected to reflect the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation but not the "Republic of Gallantry Cross Medal"
* he should be credited with one bronze service star for the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III campaign    

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214
* DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214)
* DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record)
* Excerpts from DA Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register)
* Orders, dated 16 April 1969, for the PUC
* DA Form 2545 (Cryptographic Access Authorization, Briefing Certificates)
* Two envelopes
* Unit orders, dated 22 May 1967 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 3 February 1966.  He arrived in Vietnam on 11 March 1967.  His DA Form 20 shows he served as a communications center specialist assigned to Companies A and B, 37th Signal Battalion in Vietnam from 14 March 1967 to 13 April 1967.  He was assigned to Company B, 37th Signal Battalion from 14 April 1967 to 15 January 1968.  On 18 January 1968, he was released from active duty in the temporary rank of specialist four after completing 1 year, 11 months, and 17 days of creditable active service with no time lost.

3.  His DD Form 214 shows the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)

4.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 lists the awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This pamphlet shows the 37th Signal Battalion was cited for the MUC for actions during the period 19 December 1966 to 30 September 1967 by Department of the Army General Orders 66, dated 1965.

5.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 does not show the 37th Signal Battalion was cited for the PUC or a second award of the MUC while he was assigned to it. 

6.  There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant was assigned to U.S. MACV during his assignment in Vietnam. 

7.  Records show he participated in two campaigns (Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II and Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase III) during his assignment in Vietnam.

8.  There is no evidence to show the applicant received the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary action or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows he received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service.

9.  A DD Form 215, dated 30 March 2010, added the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to his DD Form 214. 

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the PUC is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination, and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the Distinguished Service Cross to an individual. 

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the MUC is awarded to units for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services for at least 6 continuous months during the period of military operations against an armed enemy occurring on or after 1 January 1944.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states a bronze service star is worn on the appropriate service ribbon, to include the Vietnam Service Medal, for each credited campaign.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 does not show the "Republic of Gallantry Cross Medal" as an authorized award.

14.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, states the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for the first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.  There must have been no convictions by a court-martial.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant contends he was assigned to U.S. MACV in Vietnam, evidence shows he was assigned to Companies A and B, 37th Signal Battalion during his assignment in Vietnam.   

2.  His unit (37th Signal Battalion) was cited for award of the MUC while he was assigned to it.  His DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this unit award.

3.  Since the Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 does not show the 37th Signal Battalion was cited for the PUC or a second award of the MUC while the applicant was assigned to it, there is insufficient evidence on which to base adding these unit citations to his DD Form 214. 

4.  Since Army Regulation 600-8-22 does not show the "Republic of Gallantry Cross Medal" as an authorized award, there is no basis for granting his request to add this medal to his DD Form 214.

5.  He participated in two campaigns during his service in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to two bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal and correction of his DD Form 214 to show these bronze service stars.

6.  He was honorably released from active duty in the temporary rank of specialist four with over 23 months of total active service and no lost time.  He received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and he had no record of any disciplinary actions or a commander's disqualification.  It appears he met the eligibility criteria for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 3 February 1966 through 18 January 1968 based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Therefore, he should be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) and his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this award.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ___X_____  __X__  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 3 February 1966 through 18 January 1968; and 

	b.  adding the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award), MUC, and two bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal to his DD Form 214.

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to adding the PUC, a second award of the MUC, or the "Republic of Gallantry Cross Medal" to his DD Form 214.  



      _________X________________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120012006



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120012006



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1